So in your world, a masochist should go around randomly assaulting people?
I think you're both wrong. You should treat other people like you want to be treated by them.
Orfamay: Ahhhh yes, the ancient moronity of an argument against treating people as you would want them to treat you. Seriously, are all your arguments this tired, or is that just unfortunate randomness?
Thank you for the cupcake, ShinHakkaider. However, everyone else in this thread is still disrespecting me and treating me badly since they haven't also given me cupcakes. I am waiting.
I guess you're right, blacks are never roughed up by police officers and affirmative action isn't a thing.
Affirmative action is indeed a thing -- a good thing -- created in part by changes in public policy at the national level. In 1920, about one black adult in 1000 had a college degree. By 1990, about 11 percent did, and by 1998, nearly 20 percent. Affirmative action has been one of the biggest advances in the reduction of white privilege in the United States. (See, for example, United States v. Paradise [1986]).
Blacks getting roughed up by police officers is also a thing, unfortunately. And something should definitely be done about that. By astonishing coincidence, one of the things that helps with that is reducing white privilege and allowing minorities into the ranks of the police, often in the teeth of the whites concerned about protecting their privileges. There was a rather famous court case about that.... United States v. Paradise [1986].
If you have a better way to change the culture of police departments to be more minority-friendly, you're welcome to suggest it.
Affirmative action is institutionalized racism. The fact that it benefits one race doesn't make it not racism.
I would love it if police officers kept the peace rather than behaved like petty tyrants. If I knew how to fix that, I'd be doing it. You seem to want me to believe that it is my fault personally that the world isn't a better place as if I, as an individual, can influence anything more than what I have access to.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Racism is bad m'kay,
i approach every person as a Human being, whatever the politics, religion, culture, skin color, sex, sexual identification, or sexual orientation,
we are all unique indivuals that should be treated as such.
Orfamay: Ahhhh yes, the ancient moronity of an argument against treating people as you would want them to treat you.So in your world, a masochist should go around randomly assaulting people?
I think you're both wrong. You should treat other people like you want to be treated by them.
I was wondering why 2000 years of philosophical development had passed you all by.
The so-called Golden Rule didn't work then, doesn't work now, and won't work in the future. But it does provide a great excuse for imposing your cultural views on other people and then acting all haughty about how unreasonable people are to want something other than what you want, and how much you're threatened by others being different from yourself.
So in your world, a masochist should go around randomly assaulting people?
I think you're both wrong. You should treat other people like you want to be treated by them.
Sure, if they are consenting adults.
Seriously, though, it's called the Golden Rule and is found in most major religions and philosophies in some form. There is also the Silver Rule ("One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated") and the Platinum Rule ("You should do onto others as they would do on themselves"), which - admittedly - is what you said. I think neither can exist without the other and all three from a good foundation on how to communicate with other people.
You can also try to apply Kant's categorical imperative ("Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law."), although that one comes with a whole lot of philosophical baggage.
Orfamay: Ahhhh yes, the ancient moronity of an argument against treating people as you would want them to treat you.So in your world, a masochist should go around randomly assaulting people?
I think you're both wrong. You should treat other people like you want to be treated by them.I was wondering why 2000 years of philosophical development had passed you all by.
The so-called Golden Rule didn't work then, doesn't work now, and won't work in the future. But it does provide a great excuse for imposing your cultural views on other people and then acting all haughty about how unreasonable people are to want something other than what you want, and how much you're threatened by others being different from yourself.
... SO WHERE IS MY CUPCAKE, ORFAMAY???
Affirmative action is institutionalized racism. The fact that it benefits one race doesn't make it not racism.
Absolutely. And chemotherapy drugs are poison; the fact that they keep you alive instead of killing you don't make them not poisonous. "Not every decision influenced by race is equally objectionable," as the Supreme Court put it.
Affirmative action, from the beginning, was proposed and designed as a temporary measure to address the consequences of past discrimination. Also from the beginning, the plan was that when the discrimination had been sufficiently addressed, it would no longer be required, or indeed permitted.
From Grutter v. Bollliger (2003):
With respect to the use of race itself, all underrepresented minority students admitted by the Law School have been deemed qualified. By virtue of our Nation’s struggle with racial inequality, such students are both likely to have experiences of particular importance to the Law School’s mission, and less likely to be admitted in meaningful numbers on criteria that ignore those experiences.
When the mere fact of being a minority and hence seeing "white privilege" from the outside is no longer an experience of particular importance, affirmative action will disappear. That's more or less the Court's promise:
Accordingly, race-conscious admissions policies must be limited in time. This requirement reflects that racial classifications, however compelling their goals, are potentially so dangerous that they may be employed no more broadly than the interest demands. Enshrining a permanent justification for racial preferences would offend this fundamental equal protection principle. We see no reason to exempt race-conscious admissions programs from the requirement that all governmental use of race must have a logical end point. The Law School, too, concedes that all “race-conscious programs must have reasonable durational limits.”
And there's even room for discussion about whether or not we've reached that point, or when we expect to. John McWhorter has rather famously suggested that we have already reached the point where affirmative action is no longer needed, because blacks (and other minorities) are able to compete with whites on an almost-fair basis, and the only way to make the competition truly fair is to eliminate the help given to blacks. Others, myself included, note the various economic and social barriers and believe that the time is not yet here. The SCOTUS agrees with me and suggests "that 25 years from [2003], the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary."
I hope they're correct.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm afraid you're making exactly the point I was trying to make.*I* don't get followed around at stores. *I* don't have the problems you do.
Why not?
Because I'm white and you're black.
That's a MAJOR issue. The security guards should be disciplined or out-and-out fired. You are suffering *because* you are being treated differently from me.
It is an inherent problem that *YOU* can do nothing about.
What can *I* do?
Unfortunately, because I am not the employer of those security guards, I can't discipline them. If you were to name the store, I'd happily boycott it on your behalf.
But *I* would treat you as another person if I were to meet you.
And I'm being told that's not enough.
Actually, there is something you can and should do. And it is something those of us who are enjoy privaledge dont do often enough. Speak out, speak up.
There is in fact something you can do. Something we all can do but especially white people. Our privaledge gives up opportunities to act in a way that those without it dont.
This video actually is a great explanation of what we can do to help make the world a better place.
It means you need to do more then be responsible for your own actions. You need to speak out, and act against the actions of others whom you know is wrong. It means not ignoring casual racism amongs your white peers, or turning a blind eye when someone is doing something like what is mentioned in the video.
Being white gives you more room to act in situations like that. As the woman mentioned. If she spoke up, she's just the 'angry black lady' who see's racists everywhere. If I as a white man call out a security guard for unnecessarily following a black kid around the store, I certainly wont be branded the 'angry black man'. Chances are the store's owner was happy when I walked in. He sees me and thinks 'customer'. If I am unhappy with the service in his business, he is far more likely to act to change something.
And honestly, that is what needs to change. Its not enough for white people to simply not do something racist themselves. They need to act against the every day racism that white privaledge represents. Sometimes that means chewing out a cashier at a grocery store. Sometimes it means telling someone to shut up about changing the race or gender of a comic book character in a film or new comic.
And it also means, that as a New Yorker, I dont get to just say 'Hey Crime Rates are down, so no big deal right?' when the discussion of 'stop and frisk' comes up. Do I like low crime rates? Absolutely. Doesnt mean its acceptable that I am generally pleased and feel safer in the presense of police officers, and my black peers generally do not. Thats not acceptable. I have to speak out against it even if I benefit from it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
